Exploring the paper Leslie, L.M., 2019. Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences. Academy of Management Review, 44(3), pp.538-563.
Blog two of five, in a series by Dr Chrissi McCarthy.
We build evaluation into so much of what we do in work, research, and business, and yet it remains missing from so much of our EDI work. Don’t get me wrong, that doesn’t mean we don’t measure EDI outcomes, 3/4s of employees do (Miller, 2022).
However, we often focus on specific aspects, such as the diversity of apprentices, and overlook the broader story, which might show us how we fail to retain diverse apprentices.
Hiding the difference between intent and outcome.
Exploring the paper Leslie, L.M., 2019. Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences. Academy of Management Review, 44(3), pp.538-563.
Good intent in the system
Imagine if, when implementing a new email system, there was no consideration of risk, no testing, and no verification to ensure it had worked effectively.
Imagine if in a large company of 2000 people, all we did was send one test email. And if that came through, we were happy.
But what if……
- It took 50% longer to send every email due to slow functionality
- There was a 4-minute delay in sending emails due to a technical glitch.
- There was no spell-check feature.
We would also need to know these things and understand how they impacted the business.
We wouldn’t assume that everything had worked out fine due to just one variable.
Unfortunately, the situation we often find ourselves in when it comes to EDI is similar; we measure a few data points and usually fail to consider unwanted outcomes.
We assume only good things will happen.
Good intent is assumed to mean a good outcome.
Case study
A few weeks back, we had a hectic period. I was working on the project management software, and to help my colleague out, I rearranged all the upcoming work so that there were clear subheadings and sequential deadlines. I was incredibly pleased with myself and honestly felt I had made Natalie’s life a lot easier. I deemed the project a success because the desired headings were in place. Turns out there was already an informed system in place, I just hadn’t seen it, and now Natalie had to reassign over 30 tasks
1 act of good intent costs a team member 120 minutes of wasted time
My intent was good, it often is. That doesn’t mean the things I do in its name are useful. Especially if I have only considered one perspective.
Good and bad thinking
Now that doesn’t mean we have to abandon all hope; we just need to reorganise our thinking.
When we focus on intent, we can become entangled in notions of good and bad. If I do good things, I’m a good person; if I do bad things, I’m a bad person.
And that’s not the point.
Most of us are neither strictly good nor bad; we are simply doing our best to muddle through life, trying to get it right. Sometimes we fail spectacularly, other times we knock it right out of the park, but mostly we are trying to work out what on earth is happening.
Getting stuck on our moral positioning after every impact report rarely moves us forward.
Stop asking, ‘Am I good or bad?’ Start asking, ‘Was that helpful or unhelpful?’
Don’t get me wrong, questions of morality are fundamental, and I would encourage people to find their positions and place within an ethical framework. I have certainly benefited from doing so. However, when we discuss outcomes and impact, the burden of shame is rarely helpful and more often detracts from the individuals who are most impacted by the behaviour. Understanding why work might not be beneficial can prevent us from getting stuck in shame or fear, and help us navigate the issue more effectively.
Focusing on helpful versus unhelpful outcomes frees teams to experiment and learn.
Supporting paper
This is where this month’s paper (Leslie, 2019) “Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences” can help us understand the unwanted impact of our work, allowing us to recognise it as a glitch and learn how to improve it.
Why do we need to recognise the impact of EDI work?
As we discussed in the first two research cycles (RSC1 and RSC2), EDI work needs to be contextualised to have an impact. (Van den Brink and Benschop, 2012; McCarthy et al., 2021), Which means we are likely to find glitches as we find the right fit.
It’s not an individual failure; it is an expected outcome.
Understanding this and making it a recognised and expected consideration of EDI work is how we overcome inequality in our organisations.
